成唯識論述記 2.441

2.441

述曰：論主質云：此風鈴等聲，如彼所執不能別生實名、句、文；我宗亦說風鈴等聲亦無詮表。彼計語聲能生名等，風鈴等聲不能生；我許聲體能詮表，何妨風鈴等聲不能詮，以內語聲，有屈曲音韻，故能詮表。風鈴等聲則不如是，不別生實名、句等者，顯二家義，彼此風鈴並不能生實、假名等；內聲即能生實、假名等故。

The Commentary states: The author of the treatise questions them, saying: These sounds of wind, bells, and so forth, just as posited by them, cannot separately produce real words, phrases, and phonemes; our school also says that the sounds of wind, bells, and so forth lack signification. They hold that speech sound can produce words and so forth while the sounds of wind, bells, and so forth cannot produce them; I accept that the substance of sound can signify, so what prevents the sounds of wind, bells, and so forth from being incapable of signifying? Because internal speech sound has modulated tone and rhythm, it can signify; the sounds of wind, bells, and so forth are not like this. The phrase 'do not separately produce real words, phrases, and so forth' clarifies the positions of both schools: for both of us, wind, bells, and so forth cannot produce real or conventional words; whereas internal sound can produce real or conventional words.